Mumbai, Dec 7: IN A landmark ruling that recognises a woman's right along with her adult daughters to the matrimonial home even after divorce, the Bombay High Court has awarded a package of Rs 50 lakh to Madhavi Dudani and her two daughters. The package, the largest to be awarded to children of litigants, according to Advocate Neelima Datta, came after 14 years of a hard-fought legal battle.

Justices H.L. Gokhale and R.S. Dalvi's order on November 25 is a milestone on another crucial front: Madhavi was born a Christian but was married as per Hindu Vedic rites. And though Ramesh Dudani, her former husband, argued that the marriage was null and void since she was a Christian at the time of marriage and Section 2 of the Hindu Marriage Act says that marriage under that provision can only be between two Hindus, the marriage was held to be valid.

Dudani, a businessman, has been ordered to buy a self-contained flat of at least 600 sq ft in Andheri (W) or Juhu Vile Parle "in a good housing society" in the name of Madhavi and their two daughters by April-end 2006. In case he can't, he shall deposit an amount of Rs 30 lakh in court. He also has to deposit Rs 10 lakh each in the name of his two daughters, Richa and Hritu, in RBI bonds for six years and hand over the bonds to them by the April-end 2006.

The court has also ordered that Dudani can't sell or part with his bungalow in Indu Park Cooperative Housing Society in Four Bungalows, Andheri.

This amount of Rs 50 lakh is therefore secured by creating a charge on this property. In case he fails to buy a house or deposit the Rs 30 lakh and invest in bonds, Madhavi can get possession of the first floor of the bungalow in lieu of the flat. However, Madhavi consented to Dudani's proposal to provide a guarantee from a nationalised bank for Rs 50 lakh to the Registrar General of the HC in lieu of the charge on the bungalow.

Madhavi (formerly Magdalene Periera) married Dudani (a divorcee) in 1983 in a temple before several guests and her parents. This was followed by a church ceremony. After a decade together, Madhavi filed a petition in the Family Court asking for judicial separation, maintenance for herself and their daughters and partitioning the matrimonial home as she had been thrown out. The Family Court held that both petitions were outside its jurisdiction but that since Madhavi was unable to recite a single Hindu shloka or mantra and she only participated in but did not perform poojas or havans, the marriage was invalid. Madhavi appealed against this in the high court.

The deal

HC awarded Rs 50 lakh package to a man's ex-wife and two daughters, part of which is for a home for them

The court held the 1983 marriage valid though it was conducted as per Hindu Marriage Act and the bride was Christian

HT